Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2015 (1) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (1) TMI 987 - CESTAT NEW DELHIBenefit of exemption Notification No. 108/95-C.E., dated 28-8-1995 - while an exemption certificate has been produced, the same mentions the contractor’s name as “M/s. K. Rama Krishna, Plot No. 404, Veeru Castle, Durga Nagar Colony, Punjagutta, Hyderabad”, while the goods as per the invoices issued by the respondent have been supplied to M/s. Nagar Engineering Co., Jaipur. Held that:- There is no dispute that the goods supplied by the respondent were required for a project financed by the Asian Development Bank being implemented by the Government of Rajasthan. The certificate regarding requirement of the goods in question for this project has also been issued by the project implementing ‘authority’ and the same is counter-signed by the designated officers of the State Government. The certificate mentions the description and the quantity of the goods required for the project and also the name of the contractor - “M/s. K. Rama Krishna Contractor Pvt. Ltd., Hyderabad”, who has been engaged for implementation of the project. The only objection of the department is that invoices are not in the name of the contractor. We are of the view that when the invoices, though issued to M/s. Nagar Engineering Company as the buyer, show “M/s. K. Rama Krishna Contractor” as the consignee and there is no dispute that the goods though procured through M/s. Nagar Engineering Company had actually been received by M/s. K. Rama Krishna, the contractor, the benefit of the exemption under notification No. 108/95-C.E. cannot be denied. We, therefore, do not find any infirmity in the impugned order - Decided against Revenue.
|